Statins Bad press
 

EXCLUSIVE: New statin danger revealed: 150,000 at risk of developing Parkinson's disease | Health | Life & Style | Daily Express

We had a thread a year ago with many uneasy about the safety of these drugs being pushed by the drug companies at even fit and healthy individuals now the truth is coming out in many areas
Oh well profits rule not patients.

Not medically qualified so just an opinion but if half the money pumped into research on producing drugs by multi $ billion drug companies was put into finding cures we would all be in a better place than being pumped full for long periods of time by these harmful drug products which we are told are safe and then find out are NOT safe at all

Pace

Thank you for enlightening us with this academic missive from the esteemed Daily Express. I dont know the doctor myself, but understand he is a GP who spends the majority of his time in adminstrative and political roles, so with all due respect I will put more weight on the thoughts of my cardiology colleagues than his.

I really do not want to reopen debates on what is treatment or what is a cure, whether drug companies are in league with the devil, or whether doctors are all on commission from drug producers. Suffice it to say that you like any patient are free to take or not take drugs as you wish and nobody will complain.

However, this is not another issue with statins per se but interesting work on the role of cholesterol in Parkinsons. Basically high cholesterol puts you at risk of sudden death from a heart attack or a stroke whereas low cholesterol MAY make the onset of Parkinsons more likely.

I will take this additional information on board and incorporate it into my advice to patients who seek advice as to whether to take statins. Of course I always recommend the statins that lower as opposed to increase the risk of diabetes

Radgirl

Using statins for seriously ill people where the benefits might out way the downsides is one thing but promoting mass medication for people over 50 who are otherwise in reasonable health is a very dangerous and money motivated route to take.

we have to be wary of any research as the research can be tailored for or against a product.

There have been many drugs which have been given the all clear like sleeping pills and antidepressants have then been used for 20 years and dished out like sweets to then find serious an damaging side effects.

and no it doesn't suit the drug companies to find absolute cures it does suit them to have patients on expensive drugs for life

No smoke without fire! There have been enough worrying reports on Statins so early on in the the life span of the drugs to cause grave concerns over their use and probably a lot more independent studies need to be made?
As Before I am not medically qualified just concerned and like in my flying don't trust any single indication ) and I certainly would not trust research instigated by drug companies or sponsored by drug companies without equal independent and unbiased confirmation

Finally yes you are right no one forces the General public to take drugs but the general public including myself are not qualified to know so place our trust in people who are telling us that what we are taking is safe. when there are conflicting reports that trust goes

Pace

(Of course I always recommend the statins that lower as opposed to increase the risk of diabetes .)

That would imply rosuvastatin as opposed to simvastatin and atorvastatin I make so bold as to suppose?

But does the jury seems slightly hung? A very recent Finnish cohort program admitted in its findings that although the size of the group (>600) made the study reliable, the participants were all Caucasian males. Further research would thus be required to establish application as regards a statin to diabetes link as it might apply to women or even to people of ethnic origin other than Caucasian males.

Just as in every aspect of medicine there are choices. There are people who cannot easily tolerate rosuvastatin while in some the dangers caused by cholesterol might outweigh the risk of Type 2 Diabetes.

At least two points of interest are raised here though.

One is that there is more than a single type of statin. Another is that once a patient begins to take more than one (prescription) medication there can inevitably arise a conflict of side effects. General practitioners are perhaps sometimes not sufficiently familiar with their Mimses and nor can they be expected to be. Who then is the Mims expert of last resort, the mixer of potions and the interpreter of inter reactive medications?

Radgirl, good evening.
What are your views on Pravastatin or Fluvastatin? Both are said to be beneficial towards diabetes. The local GP won't prescribe it on the NHS because of the costs!
Thanks in advance

TC

There is now good evidence that there is a spectrum of activity from statins which effect the likelihood of developing diabetes in later life. Previous posters have suggested research can be biased or perhaps they mean fixed. That is not so as unles there is fraud, which results in criminal and professional sanctions (doctors get struck off), peer reviewed research is unbiased. However that is not to say that one paper fully explains everything.

The problem is that those patients on statins, or those patients entered into these trials, may already have an increased risk of diabetes. We are being rather cautious about this and as you say the NHS doesn't beleve the evidence is strong enough to move to more expensive statins. However, all these drugs are now relatively cheap and as the statins which may lower the risk of diabetes are not known to have other specific risks, I would of choice steer towards them.

There is of course nothing to stop you asking your doctor for a private prescription and purchasing the drugs on the high street or via an online chemist

Some interesting opinions on statins on this website: spacedoc.

I stopped statins 4 years ago, never regretted it, had several of the side-effects mentioned. Loss of short term memory was one of them, GP said it was just old age, same with the other effects.

Thanks Radgirl - appreciated.

I have to say - one really has to grip these GP's in general because you are made to feel inferior when they spout on about a specific drug and if you question them over it, they look down their noses at you asif to say - what do you know sonny?
I have "waded" through statins for the last 5 years. First ones (simvastatin) crippled me. I could hardly walk and it felt like my hips were failing on me. I did some research and suspected the satins. I then took myself off them for a month only to find my hip pains went completely. I went back to the GP and told him this and he told me I was one in a million suffering these side effects. So he put me on Lipitor. After several weeks, no aches or pains but I began to experience some very 'cloudy' thinking. Almost as if I would think about something but was struggling to get to the end of the thought process???
I couldn't put my finger on it, just - fuzzy thinking?? This dragged on for months and months until - research flagged up that this could be a side effect of statins. Stopped them immediately and lo and behold, the clarity in my thinking returned almost overnight!
OK - so more research on statins - went to a different doc and told him my plight. He listened (for once) and we both looked at the range of statins that might help me. By now, I had settled on Fluvastatin because of its propensity NOT to contribute towards diabetes. Sorry can't give you that buddy - it's not on our NHS list of cheap and common drugs. Try this one - Crestor. That was 6 months ago. All went well, it is definitely an aggressive cholestorol killer, my figures plumetted (UK: 5.2 to 3.8).

But now I find that Crestor has been found to increase the chances of diabetes by atleast 17%. I have stopped this now as well.

Who to believe, what to believe.......I wish Doctors would either do more research on the drugs they peddle or atleast be totally forthcoming about the side effects and not treat all patients like dullards!
Rant - off.:rolleyes:

I tried 3 different types and each had the same effects, all of them except going loony so I stopped. The decent into and recovery from the negative symptoms were the same and repeatable on each brand.

Having seen the number of people who have problems and the suspiciously enthusiastic denials of the experts I could let myself think there was a conspiracy.

Admittedly my statistical sample could be called into question as the affected people could only post on the forums I frequent whilst all the others are totally fine.:p

Here is a good explanation of one of the side effects of statin drugs, the deficiency of CoenzymeQ10 and its effects: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxWP3Q2M-Pw

there is a reason they continue to be fit and healthy.

Drug company propaganda should be viewed with a health pinch of saline.

No-one is forcing patients to take statins, prescribers only offer advice.

The evidence for the use of statins in those who are not "diseased" is very robust. The argument for rosuvastatin, Crestor etc being superior is less so.

Preventative medicines.....
 

When I was 60 – just coming up next month to 10 years ago – my GP said I had entered an age related risk zone and he suggested I take a daily dose of 75mg of aspirin and 40mg of Simvastatin. Within a few weeks I was getting severe cramps in my legs, especially at night, and he reduced the statin dose to 20mg. My cholesterol reduced from 5.7 to 3.8 and the cramps became intermittent and manageable.

After 6 years I became really ill and lost a lot of weight – nearly 30lbs. After an endoscopy they found 4 stomach/duodenal ulcers caused by the aspirin and once I stopped taking them that problem went away.

Last summer I became aware of a pain in my left side low on my waist which I put down to either a pulled muscle due to manoeuvring a heavy motor mower around or else something to do with my diverticulitis or ulcerative colitis. I mentioned it in passing to my GP but nothing was taken further. In the autumn the pain was affecting my sleeping and this time the leg cramps had returned with a vengeance. I asked to come off the Simvastatin for 3 months to see if this was the cause and this was agreed.

The pain in my side and the leg cramps had disappeared by the end of the three months. The GP asked me to try 10mg of Atorvastatin and if after a month I had no problems he would put that up to 20mg, the normal dose. At this point he said my pain issue last summer could be due to the Simvastatin.

There was no problem with 10mg but within 7 days of the dose going to 20mg two weeks ago the pain in my left side returned plus my left hip is really painful and I have stopped taking them. I have to report to my GP next week and will probably say I want to come off the statins altogether. The side effects of statins in my case are just not worth it – nor were the ulcers due to the aspirin.

After having another one of my posts removed from this forum only, I want to repeat my bad experience with statins. Four years ago I decided that enough is enough and I wanted to know why I lost my short term memory. When given a simple frequency when flying, I had to ask for repeats two or three times before getting the correct number. When going to the kitchen to fetch something to drink, by the time I got there (10 seconds later) I already had forgotten what I wanted. The doctor said it was just old age (mid 50s) and I better got used to it. I refused this as an answer and began studying.
I have read the following books, in random order:

'The great cholesterol con' by Dr Malcolm Kendrick
'The great cholesterol myth" by cardiologist Dr Stephen Sinatra
'Cholesterol is not the culprit' by Fred Kummerow PhD
'Ignore the awkward, how the cholesterol myths are kept alive' by Dr Uffe Ravnskv MD, PhD
'Statin drugs side effects and the misguided war on cholesterol' by Dr Duane Graveline
'Statin drugs and their natural alternatives' by DrJay Cohen MD
'Metabolic Cardiology' by cardiologist Dr Stephen Sinatra

Dr Stephen Sinatra used to work as a paid lobbyist for statin drugs.

Big pharma has done a wonderful job of brainwashing a considerable part of the health professionals unfortunately.

Coenzyme Q10 deficiency due to statins can be alleviated by taking the Q10 supplement available at most supermarkets. It certainly helped me when I began taking statins with many of the symptoms described by others, indeed in some parts of the world I understand that a Q10 supplements must be prescribed whenever statins are.

Statins further bad news
 

>>Statins: Heart disease drug speeds up ageing process, warns new research
STATINS make regular users become older faster, leaving them open to long-term mental and physical decline, according to disturbing new research.<<

http://www.express.co.uk/life-style/...rm-use-warning

And to think the drug companies wanted to medicate all over the age of 50 with Statins

Load of old rubbish. I've been on statins for years and have never felt better or fitter, mentally and physically

Likewise Goudie...Its the Express, they specialise in medical scare stories:ugh:...real journalism is beyond them these days

Indeed

This is not clinical research. The good professor is a cell biologist working on stem cells in a laboratory. And the expert doctor who adds his opinion is a GP well known for his views against statins who says high cholesterol levels reduce death rates.

It can be difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff

I've read the article, and it's a long way from "science."

The BMA publish loads of stuff on Critical Appraisal.

Luckily they agree with me that "Expert Opinion" is miles away from Multi-Centered Randomised Controlled Trials.

The problem with Statins are there are some pretty serious side effects already showing in.a drug which is relatively new!

With this latest claim surely further research needs to be done before these claims are so lightly dismissed!

Pace